Truth , Stranger than fiction - Data Centers

Public Shooting Range
41

That’s fair to say as intent is not easy to show or prove, look at our own US Code on proving treason “No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.” that’s a very hard bar to pass as if its a matter of proving intent is can not be reached, how do two witnesses prove your intent?

Yet you side with intent when you say

when that is completely illogical, that’s the same as saying the CIA ran drugs to control terrorism, it does not.

So what is logical is written here by AI using just that, logic

Historically for me as a non Jew I can easily see today as any past time, without loading a ton of biblical links I again asked AI to sum up

Iran may be the visible enemy, but Scripture warns that Israel’s greater danger may be a stiffnecked leadership and people who will not hear correction. An enemy outside the wall does not excuse evil within the camp. Possession of the land does not prove righteousness, and military strength does not guarantee God’s protection where rulers harden their necks, stop their ears, shed innocent blood, and refuse to repent.

I don’t know if you call it irony or coincidence or anything at all but the verses do come in part from Joshua and Ai :thinking:

But, whatever we view it as AI summed up a number of things, the one I will focus on is “shed innocent blood”

and again, AI sums as

Scripture expressly calls hands that shed innocent blood an abomination to God. It says innocent blood pollutes the land, provokes divine wrath, and brought judgment upon Judah even though Judah was God’s covenant nation. Therefore, Israel cannot claim God’s protection merely because it is Israel while its rulers shed innocent blood, oppress the weak, and refuse correction. — Proverbs 6:16–17; Numbers 35:33; 2 Kings 24:3–4; Jeremiah 22:3–5.

But I can’t deal with Israel, just you as you are here, what I suspect you should do is not think of others

again, AI sums as

Do not follow the multitude merely because it is numerous. Do not fear their faces, their reproach, or their revilings. Speak what is true, trust God, and remain standing even when standing requires standing alone.

Discussing this with you reminds me of Mark Twain. He argues that genuine patriots are scarce and despised at the beginning of reform, while timid supporters appear after success makes patriotism safe.

Hebrew prophets were not enemies of Israel; they loved Israel enough to confront its kings, priests, and rulers when loyalty to leadership conflicted with loyalty to God. I do not know where you will finally come down, but you strike me as someone capable of asking whether defending Israel must always mean defending the men governing it.

I get you’re not an Israeli or a prophet (so much as I know) and I understand why this would be difficult for you to question publicly. Scripture itself records that Israel sometimes rejected, imprisoned, and even killed those who warned it. But those prophets were not enemies of Israel. They were the ones who loved it enough to risk being hated, because they understood that defending corrupt rulers is not the same as defending the people.

So, I can see at the moment a stiff necked Jew, no offense seems a heritage trait, but what I question is might your being here already alone put you in a prime position to dare more depth/incite and personal growth?

Is the prophecy among us?

42

America does the same thing by regulating financial institutions and prohibiting the processing of funds for terrorist activity. That is likewise an attempt to “control the flow of money to ensure it d[oes] not go to terrorism.”

It’s not illogical. It’s just hard to get perfect. In contrast, to leave the flow of money completely uncontrolled would give terror free reign.

Joshua’s campaign at Ai failed because Achan had taken from the spoils, against G.d’s command (Joshua 7:11). So Joshua’s army lost Divine protection. (Some special commands applied to the conquest of the Canaanite nations which do not apply in general to wars of self-defense.) After justice was done to the sinner (Joshua 7:19-26), the nation was purified, and Joshua’s subsequent battle against Ai succeeded (Joshua 8).

There was no accusation of innocent blood there. This was about the sin of disobeying a prophet’s command. Otherwise, misappropriation of consecrated property would not be a capital sin.

I was saying that post-Oct. 7, after seeing how even Gazan civilians aided the terrorists by holding Israeli captives in private homes, doctors tortured the hostages, and Gazan parents told their terrorist kids how they wished they could also wage Jihad like them, most Israelis concluded that giving “land for peace” was a mistake, and that leaving Gaza alone led to mass self-indoctrination, and thence to the mass kidnapping, rape and slaughter of innocent Israelis. I actually came to this conclusion before Oct. 7; not because the majority of Israelis came to think so around then.

Tell that to the Gazans.

2 Likes
43

Not sure I want that responsibility, no interest to visit the middle east at all, zero, not my gig, whatever moral lesson others may draw from it, this command was first given to Israel. “Tell that to the Gazans” does not answer what Israel’s own law requires of you.

The Torah does not say that Israel may follow its own multitude because another multitude has done evil. It says:

“Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil.”

“The innocent and righteous slay thou not.”

“Every man shall be put to death for his own sin.”

Therefore, evidence that some Gazans assisted Hamas may establish the guilt of those individuals. It does not establish the guilt of every Gazan. The moment “some Gazans committed crimes” becomes “the Gazans are not innocent,” individual judgment has been replaced by collective judgment. That is precisely where judgment can be wrested.

Netanyahu must also be judged under the law, not treated as the source of the law. Deuteronomy says that Israel’s king must keep the law before him, obey it, and ensure “that his heart be not lifted up above his brethren.” The ruler is beneath the commandment; the commandment is not beneath the ruler.

Netanyahu remains on trial in Israel on corruption charges that he denies, and the International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant alleging responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Those facts do not prove that every military threat is invented or that every war is begun for his personal survival. But they do mean that blind confidence in his motives is not justified. A leader facing judgment may have interests of his own, and Torah does not permit the multitude to surrender its moral judgment to him.

I am therefore not asking you to trust Hamas, excuse October 7, or deny Israel the right to defend its people. I am asking whether support for Israel has quietly become loyalty to Netanyahu, and whether loyalty to Netanyahu has made it difficult to see innocent blood shed?

Netanyahu is not Israel. Israel is not the multitude that happens to support Netanyahu. And faithfulness to Israel’s covenant cannot mean defending everything an Israeli government does. Sometimes faithfulness requires refusing the multitude, questioning the ruler, and speaking when innocent blood is being treated as politically inconvenient.

Netanyahu and Trump are politicians, Walpurgis has witches conducting a sacrifice. “War Pigs” removes the costumes: the witches become politicians, the altar becomes the battlefield, and the poor become the offering.

That was not merely censorship making the song weaker. In one sense, it made the accusation stronger. “Walpurgis” could be dismissed as a horror story about imaginary witches. “War Pigs” reveals that the real ritual is war and that supposedly respectable officials directing it occupy the place previously held by occult celebrants.

The biblical image of Molech sharpens the comparison. Israel was forbidden to let its children “pass through the fire to Molech” because political, religious, or national necessity could never make the offering of children acceptable:

“And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech.” Leviticus 18:21

The modern equivalent need not involve a literal bronze idol. The structure remains recognizable whenever rulers preserve power, pursue ambition, or protect institutions by offering other people’s sons and daughters to destruction. The altar becomes the battlefield; the ceremonial fire becomes bombing, conscription, starvation, and ruined cities; the priests become the officials who declare the sacrifice necessary while remaining safely removed from it.

This makes the transformation from “Walpurgis” to “War Pigs” more severe, not less. The witches disappear because they are no longer needed. The apparent black mass is translated into cabinet meetings, military briefings, patriotic slogans, and official declarations of emergency.

The sacrifice has not ended; it has been made respectable.

The accusation is therefore not that every war is literally a worship service to Molech, nor that Black Sabbath expressly intended that biblical reference. It is a moral analogy:

Molech demanded children in the fire; modern rulers may demand the young, the poor, and civilians through war. Men may call the offering strategy, security, necessity, or policy but God asks whose innocent blood was shed, and He says that blood defiles the land and cries to Him from the ground.

Trump declared victory, paused the war powers clock, then treated renewed attacks as a new war.

The conflict is now spreading suffering worldwide: disrupted fuel and fertilizer supplies threaten harvests, higher food prices, and famine in already vulnerable nations.

Governments may reset a legal clock; they cannot reset the moral account for innocent blood.

So when our two nations are called the big and little satan, well, pffft, I don’t know what to say, except maybe rather than speak, to listen and choose, support this, or speak out and do not?

44

Interesting debate, with citations to the Bible even!

Anyway, I came across these interesting articles:

Bottom of the ocean of all places! Interesting how some wonder if that might cause a whole new diffrrent environmental problem.

Here’s another article about the lack of keeping track of how much water some of these data centers use:

Here’s one about another small town not too far from me attempting to recall local elected officials for allowing a data center be built on more farmland:

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/article316510686.html

3 Likes
45

Interesting term citation, it is used as a summons, a calling, i.e. a traffic citation calls you to court, the bible uses old manners of speaking that confuse not only readers but even authors intent then subsequently both, even simple things

then when you run them together and not necessary even is sequence, out of context from preceding and continuing text

then people give up as if to be

When I read your links the first thing I thought was man are we headed straight to hell, having lived in S FL with the green algae , red tide, flesh eating bacteria, I know the delicate balance of nature should not be f$cked with.

That leaves two trains of thought, going straight to hell and

Does interpretation change the consequence?

If so how can you interpret if you do not know?

Did the high priest interpret correct?

Look one way it was to cure an isolated temporal problem, look another an eternal problem

The answer is

and

If we are to be stewards and trusted with these things and the choice is continuity of status quo or use them up for what’s behind door number two and that means a whole new creation, a new and eternal existence you have to again rely on

Well, in our eyes it was wrong to crucify Christ but in Gods eyes it was the intent, so how do we not know data centers wont destroy the earth and bring about a paradise?

It is good you are here, why this place exists IDK, why any of us are here, IDK, why why why, IDK.

2 Likes
46

Mostly we’re here to talk - among friend(lie)s, about guns and God and politics and whatever comes to mind. That is what a free society does; it speaks amongst itself to check and recheck what it is doing and whether it is right or wrong.

This debate is a fine example of talking. Neither side is accusing the other of malfeasance. Neither side is making ad hominem attacks. Instead there is respectful agreement and disagreement. That is all a truly free and proper society should need. Whether one or the other side is “right” will be seen in the future. But it is good to air the various POV here as respectful men, not attempting to simply “win the day” but instead show the opposing POV.

I am inherently a warrior by nature - and life. I thus tend to align with @musashiaharon more, simply because his arguments appear more cogent to me. But I am biased by having served in two wars, one at the sharp end. I do not see my enemies as anyone to give quarter to as long as they don’t give quarter back. Actual combat tends to sharpen your sense of survival a bit more than discussion. Gooks didn’t play by the rules. So neither did you.

I had a young, inexperienced medic out on a patrol with a fire team and a squad of PF’s trip a booby trap and knock down the fire team leader. While attempting to save his life he also called a MedEvas. When the gun birds checked in, he simply cleared them to fire anywhere outside his perimeter. The two gunbirds began a protective circle while the CH-46 with the MedEvac crew settled into the zone. NO ONE KNOWS WHY the VC ville chose that moment to come streaming out en masse towards the zone. The gun bird saw a threat to his MedEvac bird and opened fire without asking - he had been cleared. He killed some 55 of the mob. Afterwards the “powers-that-be” tried to hang him for the act. He argued he had had clearance to fire anywhere outside the perimeter. They claimed that was hooey - no grunt unit would do that. I would not have had I been leading that patrol. But in truth I am not sure what I would have done when the ville started streaming out to the zone. But I supported my medic and the pilot got “off” - righteously I believe. AND I believe the medic, not really trained to fight but to save did what he had to in that circumstance.

I would feel badly about what happened to those villagers but they were clearly VC in affiliation. They were well known to make noise whenever a patrol of ours approached, to give time for the local VC to escape. I used that on occasion in a hammer-and-anvil op to catch the fleers coming out the other side of the ville. War is like that - often the sides are not clearly demarkated. I had a job to do. That was carry out the mission and save as many of my Marines as I could. Yet whenever an enemy i surrendered we acknowledged that and didn’t kill him outright. But I would cretainly bomb his ass into oblivion were I given the chance before he surrendered!

I see Israel in very similar circumstances. it is easy for us to complain, decry, and generally not concur with its decisions, but we’re not at risk THERE! I see Israel being in much the same place - a small but tough country, full of smart people, resilient, unwilling to just roll over and die. It is not Netanyahu that is doing this; it is the unrelenting and uncaring crowd of Satanists who are perpetrating these atrocities. At some point you just have to call King’s X.

3 Likes
47

:up_arrow:

Great to hear of course, as is you sharing your 80yrs of experience, that can’t be substituted and should never be ignored.

3 Likes
48

It looks like in absolute terms, water usage by AI data centers is vanishingly small. All US data centers used 17.4B gal/year in 2023, compared to 531B by US golf courses in the same year. That, in turn, was less than residential lawn irrigation at 3,000B. So we use something like 200x more to water our lawns than to cool all data centers. Maybe it will be something to worry about in a decade, but it’s a non-issue right now.

6:35: Sean Westwood: Water use is just not a credible argument against the growth of AI data centers. It is misinformation.

2 Likes
49

Is this be an apples to oranges comparison?

Are all three figures measuring the same thing in the same way?

Does the 17.4 billion gallon figure include the water consumed in generating the electricity used by data centers?

Can a national total reveal what happens to the aquifer, utility, watershed, and household wells surrounding a large data center complex?

Are lawns, golf courses, and data centers drawing water from the same sources, at the same times, and with the same local intensity?

Does a 2023 figure adequately represent the enormous AI data centers now being proposed and constructed?

Does showing any another industry’s water use prove that data center water consumption is harmless or sustainable?

Or is this the doubt factor applied, itself misinformation and manipulation, is this all meant to get us to dismiss the bigger question of why so many are even being built with such abandon, just more of the same status quo we’ve seen forever, mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur?

1 Like
50

Some good questions. Overall, water consumption doesn’t seem to be a problem, but it might be in specific areas. So, as with most things, one needs both a strategic sense and a tactical one. Power is a necessary thing, regardless of AI & data centers. Texas got bamboozeled into “green energy“ when it has a plethora of oil-based sources. So the grid got knocked down when heavy winter storms came. But overall, energy was OK. No matter the overall picture, one still needs to look at local circumstances.

We would also do well to look elsewhere for power. Nukes, sea water are potential viable alternate ideals. Somewhere I read (maybe clickbait) that China was building a data center underwater. Great outside-the- box thinking! We need some of that.

2 Likes